[MD] The Grand Design

[ADRIE KINTZIGER]

Hi, Mr Buchanan, i'm still in short of timen to read further on in William
James his work, but i did perform some reading
on the principles of philosophy, to investigate the rolling in of the
pluralistic tought, caught my attention that James is framing religion
as a qualityeffort in the same sentence, in the work, But given the
timeframe, and how America is on religion, i will filter it out.
I will read over it.

Got so many thing to do , Dave, i need 40 hours a day at least, i also need
to redecorate my living room, and order a new fireplace
with nice stone-masonry aroud it for the chimney, will take a lot of time.

If you like to abstract things on my posting to Dan, or clarify, or take out
distortions if you see them, feel free to do so,i like free lessons,
especially if they are high level.They always are.

Maybe i can read more the coming days.
greetz, Adrie

2010/10/17 david buchanan <dmbuchanan at hotmail.com>

>
> Mark said to Adrie:
> If what you guys are suggesting is an attitude of humility and reverence,
> then I must add that I have been to lectures presented by Hawkins.  I can
> tell you that the expression on his face is one of arrogance and disdain...
>  There was an interview with the coauthor a few weeks ago on NPR or some
> affiliate.  There is no suggestion of humility there either.  My way or the
> highway.  In fact the suggestion was of the disproval of God.  Now Andrie,
> from reading the book, would you say this is correct?
>
>
>
> dmb says:
>
> You're going to dismiss one of the world's greatest scientist because of
> the look on his face? Mark, buddy, dude. That would be ridiculous even if he
> didn't have a disfiguring and paralyzing disease, but he does. What cruel
> nonsense! Is that supposed to be some kind of sick joke, or what?
> Can you imagine how desperately anyone in his situation would like to have
> an expressive face and a voice of his own?
> I heard an interview or two with the co-author and he was quite eager to
> dispute the notion that their book denied the existence of God. Their actual
> claim, he insisted, was that God was not part of their physical
> explanations, that it isn't necessary to invoke God in physics.
>
>
>
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
>



-- 
parser